View Single Post
Old 03-01-2018, 6:42 AM
Mulay El Raisuli's Avatar
Mulay El Raisuli Mulay El Raisuli is offline
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 3,595
iTrader: 0 / 0%

Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
If Heller doesn't so hold, why does Mr. Nichols continue to argue that it does?

Because dicta matters. So, while Heller didn't RULE that Open Carry is the Protected Right, by citing Nunn, etc, it sent a pretty big hint that OC was the only manner of "and bear" that they would support. ALL of the Circuits (and me, BTW) took that hint. That's why ALL of the Circuits denied each and every case we sent them, and is why my predictions that that is exactly what they would do have come true.

Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
What if he wins in the sense that the Ninth is forced to recognize the right, but further holds that it is subject to "reasonable restrictions" in the public interest, which of course, will include every incorporated city and ton in the entire state? Don't you think, given this court's past history of applying a rational basis analysis (while calling it intermediate scrutiny), that this is the most likely outcome? And if this is indeed the result, any attack on GFSZs would be entirely fruitless. And yet again, we are faced with the same old issue: we cannot win any of these cases until the Supreme court intervenes and instructs lower courts in no uncertain terms as to the applicable standard of review, and more importantly, the manner in which that standard is to be applied. As things stand right now, the liberal circuits are applying the same sliding scale analysis that Scalia specifically rejected in Heller.

Even if that happens (which I don't think will happen, but agree is possible), it would still be a better result than any of the Right People have gotten in the last ten years. Who, you'll recall, have been doing nothing but offering a big 'ol heaping of FAIL ever since Heller did NOT say anything about "the state gets to choose the manner of 'and bear.'"

My guess isn't that the GFSZs will fall just because having of OC recognized as the Right. But that recognition, coupled with the efforts of others on The Left to have them struck down (because it gets People of Color extra years in the House of Many Doors for drug dealing) will do the trick.

Originally Posted by kcbrown View Post

No, sir. Your argument is now officially dead in the water at SCOTUS. Your argument thus cannot now be that SCOTUS said what you claim, since SCOTUS has clearly divested itself of it. You can now only argue (at most) that Scalia said it. But the support of one (now dead) justice is not sufficient, especially when his replacement doesn't take up that mantle.

You can, of course, continue to believe in the argument that you continue to put forth. Everyone is entitled to believe what they wish, even when the real world clearly contradicts it. But your argument is now a faith-based one, equivalent to a religious assertion, and not a logical argument with supporting evidence, since the unanimous and unequivocal evidence is against it.

It was always a faith-based argument. One now, I must agree, is DOA.


Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post

Before: BERZON and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and GLEASON,*
District Judge.
Submission of this case is vacated pending issuance of a decision in Young
v. State of Hawai’i, No. 12-17808.

I admit I haven't been following Young. What does this mean, do you think?

The Raisuli
"Ignorance is a steep hill with perilous rocks at the bottom"

WTB: 9mm cylinder for Taurus Mod. 85
WTS: Model 94 AE 30-30
Reply With Quote